Section 80JJAA employee-cost deduction allowed for deployed staff but barred against transfer-pricing income enhancement, with pricing issues remanded...
Transfer-pricing methodology protects commercially genuine associated-enterprise payments, while pre-2016 secondary adjustments and related notional i...
Negative liens over operating assets can constitute international transactions requiring arm's-length pricing reflecting restricted borrowing and expa...
Cross-examination rights in Customs Broker revocation inquiries require witness examination; procedural denial may be cured through fresh adjudication...
Governmental authority status supports construction-service exemption, while pre-cutoff contract and stamp-duty compliance requires verification on re...
Page of 4826
Press 'Enter' after typing page number.
81 to 100 of 96510 Results
❮
❯
❯❯
0 / 200
Expand Note
Add to Folder
No Folders have been created
+
Are you sure you want to delete "My most important" ?
CESTAT allowed the appeal of the 100% EOU, holding that the benefit of N/N. 52/2003-Cus applies to inputs used in manufacture even where wastage exceeds SION norms, provided the inputs are actually used in the production process and waste/scrap is duly cleared on payment of duty and not removed unauthorisedly. Relying on the interpretation of the non-obstante clause in the notification, the Tribunal rejected the Department's view that excess wastage automatically attracted duty or penalty. It held that the Commissioner and the adjudicating authority had erred in demanding customs duty of Rs. 34,555/-, imposing penalty of Rs. 5,000/- and redemption fine of Rs. 20,000/-. All such demands and penalties were set aside, and the appeal was fully allowed.
CESTAT allowed the appeal of the 100% EOU, holding that the benefit of N/N. 52/2003-Cus applies to inputs used in manufacture even where wastage exceeds SION norms, provided the inputs are actually used in the production process and waste/scrap is duly cleared on payment of duty and not removed unauthorisedly. Relying on the interpretation of the non-obstante clause in the notification, the Tribunal rejected the Department's view that excess wastage automatically attracted duty or penalty. It held that the Commissioner and the adjudicating authority had erred in demanding customs duty of Rs. 34,555/-, imposing penalty of Rs. 5,000/- and redemption fine of Rs. 20,000/-. All such demands and penalties were set aside, and the appeal was fully allowed.
Note: It is a system-generated summary and is for quick reference only.
TaxTMI 
TaxTMI 
of 4826 
Join Channel 
